On Fri, 11 Jun 1999 22:43:00 -0700, Kent Crispin <kent@SONGBIRD.COM>
wrote:
>Yes, it was NSI that was booted. The ICANN board modified their
>original position in response to widely held public opinion (just as
>you claim they never do), and restricted NSI to one seat.
I take GREAT offense in your characterization here Kent!
The widely held public opinion you quote here is ONLY the opinion of
the majority of the rest of the so called Names Council, made up
almost EXCLUSIVELY of ISOC/CORE supporters and Corporate interests all
of whom have a major axe to grind. That this "Names Council" was even
PERMITTED to meet like this is a violation of the intent, for the
constituencies have NOT had a chance to solicit memberships after
recognition or to develop and publish means of voting for these seats.
These "appointments" are a joke and nothing more than an attempt to
maintain control and meet secretly in order to push through adoption
of policies that are WIDELY opposed.
This is a farce of the largest magnitude to call this widely held
public opinion.
I've had it with your mischaracterizations and word games.
You are an excellent liar, Mr Crispin, because you do it with JUST
barely enough truth to make it believable to the uninformed or those
who are in the middle on these issues and trying to figure out what is
going on. You oppose openness and indeed ANYTHING that might possibly
cause harm to the positions of the gTLD-MoU supporters and their
goals. You think the ends justify the means, and that adoption of the
gTLDMoU points despite wide objection to them, is acceptable because
it is what you view as best for the rest of the people on the
internet. You are even willing to support extremely unpopular
policies such as WIPO because of the reciprocal support you expect to
get for the adopt of gTLD-MoU princples.
It is time for someone to start telling the truth about this mess. It
is time to expose this disingenuity for what it is and what its
results will be.
The DNSO has been captured. CORE has won the goal they set out when
they setup the dnso.org effort and the meetings in Barcelona and
Monterrey. ICANN is no in the hands of those have NO interest in
public opinion or getting a consensus of the people for whom their
policies will have the most effect.
Kent Crispin asked us to trust him when the DNSO was setup by their
faction. I gave them the benefit of the doubt at that point and
honestly believed that they would stick to their word about openness
and wide representation. Now Kent has joined a mailing list of a
group whose goal he opposes, and his posts there are nothing more than
obvious blatent attempts to disrupt the discussion and turn discussion
to non-productive matters in an effort to keep it from turning into a
cohesive group that would be able to demand recognition from ICANN and
stand opposed to many of the policies he is doing his damnest to force
on all of us.
Esther Dyson asked us to trust her to not let this process be captured
by the special interests, and that she would make sure we had the
means to have our voices be heard and the ability to participate in
this process on an equal basis.
Others in the DNSO and ICANN made similar promises.
They should all be VERY VERY ashamed. The media should be ashamed for
not covering this, and taking a very antiseptic view of this process.
It is time for the media to become a PARTICIPANT and observer, and see
on a daily basis what this process has turned into, and not just
interview for small sound bites from Esther and Mike.
All I can saw is that with every passing day, this process is creating
more and more for the lawyers to use in fighting this unjust effort
that is happening under extremely false pretenses.
ICANN needs to send explicit instructions to the DNSO.org people to
stop this Names Council farce until the constituencies have time to
actually form with REAL members who can ELECT names council
representatives. This should include MANDATORY advertisement of the
existance of the constituencies in the WIDEST possible forms to insure
that a broad spectrum of those who would qualify for membership have
such an opportunity.
If it fails to do this, it is proving that this entire mess is nothing
more than an effort to meet the needs of small special interests, and
to force a set of policies on us that was resoundingly opposed and
indeed stopped (yes, I mean the gTLD-MoU) and other policies that have
WIDESPREAD opposition in the internet community (which is much larger
than either the Trademark community or the ISOC).
--
William X. Walsh
General Manager, DSo Internet Services
Email: william@dso.net Fax:(209) 671-7934
"Let the people think they govern and they will be governed."
- William Penn, founder of Pennsylvania